Saudi Arabia Blood Money: Sexist & Bigoted!

Previous page 1 2« Previous thread | Next thread »
- Zaephon
- Ex-Muslim
- offline
Re: Saudi Arabia Blood Money: Sexist & Bigoted!
Reply #30 - June 09, 2009, 11:00 AM

Quote from: Q-Man on June 09, 2009, 10:20 AM
Well, I gotta get back to bed and catch a couple more hours sleep, but for now, I just think it's interesting that in this link you provided: http://www.wernercohn.com/Chomsky.html, the author basically calls IDF vet and Holocaust survivor Israel Shahak an anti-Semite and Nazi/Islamist enabler for doing, essentially, what everyone here does-- rejecting the religion of his birth and writing about its brutalities, irrationality, and hypocrisy. I guess if you're an ex-Muslim and do that you're "liberated", a "freethinker" but if a Jew does it he's a nasty self-hating enabler for anti-Semites?

I'll try to get to the rest later.

Well, Shahak did more than criticise orthodox Judaism. There is an important line between criticising Judaism and making anti-Semitism acceptable. Israel Shahak preached that anti-Semitism was the product of "Jewish chauvinism." It was no coincidence that David Duke mourned Israel Shahak, and dedicated a book to him. Different anti-Semitic channels like Radio Islam, Bible Believers, Jew Watch, and Historical Review Press quote him often.

I do not reiterate mediaeval Christian propaganda about Muslims. Do I ever make statements like, Muslims worship Satan? However, as Werner Cohn also explains, Israel Shahak made outrageous statements in that vein, some of which were directly stolen from older anti-Jewish polemics or fabricated on spot. The telephone incident in 1965 (about breaking the Sabbath) exposed one of Israel Shahak's most important fabrications, for example.

Quote from: Werner Cohn
Dr. Shahak is full of startling revelations, if that is the word, about Jewish history and the Jewish religion. None of those I was able to check had any foundation...Some are just funny. He says (pp. 23-4) that "Jewish children are actually taught" to utter a ritual curse when passing a non-Jewish cemetery.[25] He also tells us (p. 34) that "both before and after a meal, a pious Jew ritually washes his hands....On one of these two occasions he is worshiping God... but on the other he is worshiping Satan..."

Yes, hear that. A pious Jew worships Satan. Israel Shahak really sounds like a liberated free-thinker, doesn't he?

Islam: where idiots meet terrorists.
- Zaephon
- Ex-Muslim
- offline
Re: Saudi Arabia Blood Money: Sexist & Bigoted!
Reply #31 - June 12, 2009, 06:16 PM

Yes, Q?

Islam: where idiots meet terrorists.
- Colonel Q-Daffi
- White Trash Sand Wigga
- Pub Regular
- offline
Re: Saudi Arabia Blood Money: Sexist & Bigoted!
Reply #32 - June 12, 2009, 08:18 PM

Quote from: Zaephon on June 12, 2009, 06:16 PM
Yes, Q?

Sorry, got caught up with brucepig. Anyhow, I'm going to offer you a response you are sure to find unsatisfying as I've lost interest in the discussion due to (1) being away from the thread for a while when I was debating brucepig and (2) right now I'm trying to organize pickets and other actions in 3 cities hundreds of miles away from each other while out of town on assignment and dealing with a coalition leader who's suddenly decided to become difficult to work with and is being stubborn on a meeting agenda which I now have to recruit people to make a motion on since I will not be there-- and all of this is giving me a headache, literally and figuratively.

So this won't be a great response and I expect you'll find plenty of room to make valid criticisms of what I'm about to write, but here goes, in brief...

1. Most of the Chomsky stuff you provided I do not find satisfying because it's largely short Chomsky quotes with little accompanying context.

2. From what I've read on the Faurrisson controversy, I can't defend Chomsky's position/conduct, but I don't necessarily believe that makes Chomsky an anti-Semite (or apologist for them), nor does it necessarily invalidate his analysis on various topics.

3. I read through the whole Warner Cohn thing and, well, I just distrust it given the man's political perspective. Which may not be entirely fair, I'll grant you, but it's hard to determine how legit his criticisms are of what Chomsky has done and written without looking at the broader context, and, as my copy of the Fateful Triangle is, along with many of my other books, being held hostage out of state (as they have been for some years now, and I don't even know where they are at this point-- long fucking story), I can't easily reference the points he is pulling from there.

I'll freely acknowledge I'm approaching this from a pro-Chomsky bias-- not that I'll reject any criticism of Chomsky out of hand, but criticisms of these sort would require more evidence than you have provided to convince me, given my bias. Not that you are necessarily obligated to provide such detailed evidence to me, just being honest here.

fuck you
- Zaephon
- Ex-Muslim
- offline
Re: Saudi Arabia Blood Money: Sexist & Bigoted!
Reply #33 - June 13, 2009, 10:41 AM

Quote from: Q-Man
1. Most of the Chomsky stuff you provided I do not find satisfying because it's largely short Chomsky quotes with little accompanying context.

Quotes are supposed to be short excerpts. If you have better contrary evidence, you are welcome to post longer excerpts. Otherwise, you fail to convince anybody. Why does Noam Chomsky avoid the topic of Islamic oppression? Perhaps the victims of Islam can be understood as "collateral damage" in Noam Chomsky's petty crusade against the American Empire?

Quote from: Q-Man
2. From what I've read on the Faurrisson controversy, I can't defend Chomsky's position/conduct, but I don't necessarily believe that makes Chomsky an anti-Semite (or apologist for them), nor does it necessarily invalidate his analysis on various topics.

Your rationale being? Chomsky didn't simply defend their freedom of speech. He made some bizarre statements about the virtues of the Holocaust revisionists. He is a man so deeply prejudiced that anybody who opposes the evil American Empire is a warrior of truth in his eyes.

Quote from: Q-Man
3. I read through the whole Warner Cohn thing and, well, I just distrust it given the man's political perspective. Which may not be entirely fair, I'll grant you, but it's hard to determine how legit his criticisms are of what Chomsky has done and written without looking at the broader context, and, as my copy of the Fateful Triangle is, along with many of my other books, being held hostage out of state (as they have been for some years now, and I don't even know where they are at this point-- long fucking story), I can't easily reference the points he is pulling from there.

Uh, are you telling me that you have difficulty accepting evidence that comes from sources other than the Far Left? I should perhaps add that Israel Shahak was worse than Chomsky is, in terms of spreading anti-Semitism. Does it mean anything to you that Shahak is the ace star of many anti-Jewish conspiracy theories? Just an odd coincidence? He didn't just criticise orthodox Judaism you know, he attempted to justify anti-Semitism, and literally fabricated accusations when necessary. He defended that anti-Semitism is the product of "Jewish chauvinism," which effectively absolves anti-Semites from any guilt.

Why do you think David Duke mourned Israel Shahak's death?

Islam: where idiots meet terrorists.
- Colonel Q-Daffi
- White Trash Sand Wigga
- Pub Regular
- offline
Re: Saudi Arabia Blood Money: Sexist & Bigoted!
Reply #34 - June 13, 2009, 02:14 PM

Quote from: Zaephon on June 13, 2009, 10:41 AM
Quotes are supposed to be short excerpts. If you have better contrary evidence, you are welcome to post longer excerpts. Otherwise, you fail to convince anybody.

I think I already indicated my post would not be convincing. As I stated earlier, I've kinda lost interest in the topic, so I'm not gonna go through the trouble to find things by or about Chomsky to attempt to refute your claims, which will be all the more difficult as I don't have access to my books by him, as I explained.

Quote
Why does Noam Chomsky avoid the topic of Islamic oppression? Perhaps the victims of Islam can be understood as "collateral damage" in Noam Chomsky's petty crusade against the American Empire?

I dunno, maybe the same reason you ignore Western aggression and imperialism. Chomsky is from the West, so maybe he chooses to influence people in the Western world to change their own foreign policy, while you are from the Muslim world so choose to focus inward. Whatever the case, choosing to focus on the wrongs of one thing does not necessarily mean you approve of wrongs you fail to address.

Quote
Uh, are you telling me that you have difficulty accepting evidence that comes from sources other than the Far Left?

No, telling you that after reading what this guy wrote I don't trust where he's coming from. I already copped to having a bias so I don't see why you're continuing to harp on the issue.

Quote
I should perhaps add that Israel Shahak was worse than Chomsky is, in terms of spreading anti-Semitism. Does it mean anything to you that Shahak is the ace star of many anti-Jewish conspiracy theories? Just an odd coincidence? He didn't just criticise orthodox Judaism you know, he attempted to justify anti-Semitism, and literally fabricated accusations when necessary. He defended that anti-Semitism is the product of "Jewish chauvinism," which effectively absolves anti-Semites from any guilt.

Honestly, I don't know all that much about Israel Shahak

Quote
Why do you think David Duke mourned Israel Shahak's death?

Neocons and other Western reactionaries would agree with much of what you write, but does that make you a neocon?

Anyhow, like I said, I'm kinda tired of discussing this topic. You can go ahead and declare victory of you like-- I'll admit you did a much better job of presenting your case than I did. That being said, I still like Chomsky and am not convinced he's an apologist for anti-Semitism or Islamism. Sorry.

fuck you
- Rashna
- Pub Regular
- offline
Re: Saudi Arabia Blood Money: Sexist & Bigoted!
Reply #35 - June 14, 2009, 02:35 PM

Quote from: Q-Man on June 13, 2009, 02:14 PM
I dunno, maybe the same reason you ignore Western aggression and imperialism. Chomsky is from the West, so maybe he chooses to influence people in the Western world to change their own foreign policy, while you are from the Muslim world so choose to focus inward.

Loads of Islamist violence-like that in Thailand, Philippines, Bali & so on have nothing to do with Western aggression & imperialism-yet along with blaming stuff on Western aggression & imperialism, Chomsky chooses to ignore these as well. Because they don't involve Western aggression, yet they involve Islamic violence, its difficult to blame them on the Big Bad West, & if Chomsky starts blaming too many people, including many non Westerners he'll:

1) Immediately lose the support of other West hating liberals, because now too many non Westerners are being blamed as well.

2) His final conclusion-that Western imperialism is responsible for Islamic jihads & attacks will immediately appear faulty since there're too many non Westerners who too are victims of Islamist attacks. Rather than blame the whole non Muslim world, people will see through the faulty logic & blame Islam itself, which is what leftists like Chomsky hope to avoid at all costs.

Thus, his emphasis on what wrongs the West has done vis a vis Islam, rather than actually speaking of Thailand, Philippines, Bali etc.

World renowned historian Will Durant"...the Islamic conquest of India is probably the bloodiest story in history. It is a discouraging tale, for its evident moral is that civilization is a precious good, whose delicate complex order and freedom can at any moment be overthrown..."
- Ansar al-Zindiqi
- Member
- offline
Re: Saudi Arabia Blood Money: Sexist & Bigoted!
Reply #36 - June 14, 2009, 04:26 PM

Quote from: Q-Man on June 13, 2009, 02:14 PM
Anyhow, like I said, I'm kinda tired of discussing this topic. You can go ahead and declare victory of you like-- I'll admit you did a much better job of presenting your case than I did. That being said, I still like Chomsky and am not convinced he's an apologist for anti-Semitism or Islamism. Sorry.

Sad ain't it? There are so many people like this who will fabricate all kinds of rhetorical replies to get out of a tight situation when it becomes clear that the paradigm they hold dear is showing itself to be more than a little brittle. All too often they are very bright and have a handle on plenty of issues that many others can envy but it is this issue of being apologists for such rancid characters as Hezbollah and other assorted creeps in which they really fall flat. They should know better and if left alone by themselves for some time they might just come around but as it stands they have their friends and this is the dysfunctional support group they can fall back on to prop up a bold front in the face of whithering evidence. I had to face facts well over a decade ago and see that the Left (not just Communists) has really lost it's way. At that time many Left activists were heady with feelings of victory because such a big splash had been made in 1999 in Seattle and also because they had made many inroads into mainstream America that hadn't really been achieved since the Thirties. I was once one of them but Islam was looming on the horizon but nobody else around me seemed to notice since they were as high as kites over their recent successes. Chomsky has made huge contributions in his time but his golden years are about as jaded as his take on the Golden Age of Islam. If he had really been serous about explaining how the world works he would have at least pre-empted the likes of Martin Kramer from writing this book and put a leftist spin to it. But he didn't and the nexus of leftist collaboration with Big Oil is what made the likes of him, Edward Said, Tariq Ali and many others so prominent in the current ongoing public discourse in the West about Islam.

Very few people (much less leftists) keep this in mind since it's so damn inconvenient and embarrassing. I do and I'm glad I made the decision to apostate from the Left over a decade ago now. I've been defamed and shouted down and snickered at over the years and at first it was difficult but at least I knew I wasn't alone. One doesn't have to be a ranting neo-con nor even an anarcho-syndicalist with eco-socialist tendencies to realize that being an apologist for Islam goes against common human decency. There never has been an excuse for aiding and abetting these types of people but much of the extreme Left has gone overboard and laughed at the life jackets before they realized that solid ground was a long ways away. It's too bad that they've also persuaded many others to take the same line of thinking and there's nothing "progressive' about that.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V1mZEK9ro6A&feature=channel_page
- Colonel Q-Daffi
- White Trash Sand Wigga
- Pub Regular
- offline
Re: Saudi Arabia Blood Money: Sexist & Bigoted!
Reply #37 - June 14, 2009, 05:16 PM

Quote from: Ansar al-Zindiqi on June 14, 2009, 04:26 PM
Sad ain't it? There are so many people like this who will fabricate all kinds of rhetorical replies to get out of a tight situation

If you want to criticize my post in that thread, then reply directly to it in that thread. You haven't even bothered to answer the very simple question I posed to you there.

As to the rest of your post, I didn't even bother paying close attention past the first couple of sentences as I have no interest in your generalized critique of the left. I might, had not I lost all respect for you several months ago after you got your panties in a bunch because people were pointing out things they liked about Islam in a thread specifically for that purpose, then melted-down after I repeatedly schooled yer ass, and you started posting bizarre photos and unhinged one-liners. I did quickly scan through your post, however, and your comparison of changing political beliefs to apostasy is lame, weak, and disingenuous. It's not even worth replying to.

fuck you
- Zaephon
- Ex-Muslim
- offline
Re: Saudi Arabia Blood Money: Sexist & Bigoted!
Reply #38 - June 14, 2009, 08:22 PM

Quote from: Q-Man
I did quickly scan through your post, however, and your comparison of changing political beliefs to apostasy is lame, weak, and disingenuous.

I really have to disagree with that. Changing political beliefs can be just as difficult and complex as leaving a religion.

Islam: where idiots meet terrorists.
- Colonel Q-Daffi
- White Trash Sand Wigga
- Pub Regular
- offline
Re: Saudi Arabia Blood Money: Sexist & Bigoted!
Reply #39 - June 14, 2009, 10:47 PM

Quote from: Zaephon on June 14, 2009, 08:22 PM
I really have to disagree with that. Changing political beliefs can be just as difficult and complex as leaving a religion.

A dramatic shift in political beliefs is more like quitting smoking-- all of a sudden you become self-righteously obnoxious towards people who are doing the same things now that you used to do. And the bigger, more dramatic the shift, the worse it is. Former fascists who become communists or anarchists are among the most dogmatic and violent of leftists, and former Trotskyites who turned reactionary (neocons) have become some of the most vile and despicable people in the "conservative" movement in this country, responsible for wrecking Iraq (and nearly wrecking our own country) in the pursuit of their warped and naive ideology.

I find that sudden and dramatic shifts in ideology are due either to the brashness of youth or due to cognitive dissonance breaking one dogmatic world view, so the person leaps to an equally dogmatic but opposite world view. Evolution and maturation of personal political thought is a good thing, but when it comes to dramatic and rapid shifts in political thought, most of the time it just amounts to someone changing from a left-wing doctrinaire asshole to a right-wing doctrinaire asshole (or vice-versa).

fuck you
- Zaephon
- Ex-Muslim
- offline
Re: Saudi Arabia Blood Money: Sexist & Bigoted!
Reply #40 - June 14, 2009, 11:36 PM

Quote from: Q-Man on June 14, 2009, 10:47 PM
A dramatic shift in political beliefs is more like quitting smoking-- all of a sudden you become self-righteously obnoxious towards people who are doing the same things now that you used to do. And the bigger, more dramatic the shift, the worse it is.

Interesting.

I have never experienced such a sudden and dramatic ideological shift myself. I still cannot decide whether I am a social democrat or a classical liberal, actually. Leftists in Turkey have an intense hatred for anything liberal. And personally, despite the fact that I admire classical liberalism, I find Turkish liberals myopic and idiotic. They have allied themselves with Islamists, and they deserve nothing but contempt in their current state. So far, Kemalism is the only ideology that I consider fighting for.

Quote from: Ansar al-Zindiqi
One doesn't have to be a ranting neo-con nor even an anarcho-syndicalist with eco-socialist tendencies to realize that being an apologist for Islam goes against common human decency.

This is very, very true. Simple human morality is enough to realise the horrors of Islam. I cannot stand any Islamic apologists, no matter what their ideological colours are.

Islam: where idiots meet terrorists.
- Colonel Q-Daffi
- White Trash Sand Wigga
- Pub Regular
- offline
Re: Saudi Arabia Blood Money: Sexist & Bigoted!
Reply #41 - June 14, 2009, 11:54 PM

Quote from: Zaephon on June 14, 2009, 11:36 PM
Interesting.

I have never experienced such a sudden and dramatic ideological shift myself.

I have, a few times, then I grew the fuck up (well, not entirely, but in some aspects I have and that's one of them). Over the last few years the shifts in my political thought have been evolutionary rather than radical.

Quote
I still cannot decide whether I am a social democrat or a classical liberal, actually.

Why decide between the two? Syncretic belief systems can be quite liberating-- no party line to follow, no danger of heresy-- just pick the elements of each ideology that you like and reject those that don't make sense to you. Plus it keeps the people on internet discussion forums on their toes.

Quote
Leftists in Turkey have an intense hatred for anything liberal.

How's that?

Quote
And personally, despite the fact that I admire classical liberalism, I find Turkish liberals myopic and idiotic. They have allied themselves with Islamists, and they deserve nothing but contempt in their current state.

How's that?

fuck you
- Zaephon
- Ex-Muslim
- offline
Re: Saudi Arabia Blood Money: Sexist & Bigoted!
Reply #42 - June 15, 2009, 12:24 AM

Quote from: Q-Man
How's that?

Long story. I am aware that "liberals" and "the Left" are quite interchangeable in the United States. In other parts of the world, this is not always the case. In Turkey, liberals are usually right-wing, even though some of their rhetoric is stolen from the Left. They have allied themselves with the Islamist JDP. These wretched liberals think that attacking secularism is somehow defending liberalism. The newspaper Taraf is an good example of a bunch of myopic liberals who attack Kemalists while defending Islamists. The Wikipedia article is biased of course, but it may give you an idea.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Taraf

Quote from: Q-Man
Syncretic belief systems can be quite liberating-- no party line to follow, no danger of heresy-- just pick the elements of each ideology that you like and reject those that don't make sense to you.

I am not interested in any kind of orthodoxy, unless the orthodoxy is in line with my own views. But social democracy and classical liberalism already have a lot in common. I am unable to make up my mind regarding matters that distinguish between the two.

Islam: where idiots meet terrorists.
- Colonel Q-Daffi
- White Trash Sand Wigga
- Pub Regular
- offline
Re: Saudi Arabia Blood Money: Sexist & Bigoted!
Reply #43 - June 15, 2009, 12:39 AM

Quote from: Zaephon on June 15, 2009, 12:24 AM
I am unable to make up my mind regarding matters that distinguish between the two.

For instance?

fuck you
- Zaephon
- Ex-Muslim
- offline
Re: Saudi Arabia Blood Money: Sexist & Bigoted!
Reply #44 - June 15, 2009, 01:20 AM

Quote from: Q-Man on June 15, 2009, 12:39 AM
For instance?

Mixed economy or free market, welfare state or no welfare state, restricting individual liberty to advance social progress, etc.

Then again, the chasm between Turkish leftists and liberals is more than that. Our idiotic liberals, at least most of them, try to justify Islamofascism because of their own problems with Kemalism. They appeal to the persecution complex and paranoia of the Islamic masses.

Islam: where idiots meet terrorists.
- crueljewel
- Ex-Muslim
- offline
Re: Saudi Arabia Blood Money: Sexist & Bigoted!
Reply #45 - June 15, 2009, 02:44 AM

Quote from: Rashna on June 08, 2009, 02:47 PM
In Saudi Arabia, when a person has been killed or caused to die by another, the prescribed blood money rates are as follows:
*   100,000 riyals if the victim is a Muslim man
*   50,000 riyals if a Muslim woman
*   50,000 riyals if a Christian man
*   25,000 riyals if a Christian woman

My (Christian) Alma Mater has a Saudi funded Middle Eastern Studies school. I really wonder how they can possibly take money from a people who clearly think their lives are worth less.

So a believer is superior to a non-believer, eh? Is that why a Christian male is worth the same as a Muslim female?
- Ansar al-Zindiqi
- Member
- offline
Re: Saudi Arabia Blood Money: Sexist & Bigoted!
Reply #46 - June 19, 2009, 03:16 PM

Quote from: Q-Man on June 14, 2009, 05:16 PM
If you want to criticize my post in that thread, then reply directly to it in that thread. You haven't even bothered to answer the very simple question I posed to you there.

So, you're a tough guy who sets the parameters of debate now eh? I don't think so. I'll answer it in my own sweet time thank you very much.

Quote from: Q-Man on June 14, 2009, 05:16 PM
As to the rest of your post, I didn't even bother paying close attention past the first couple of sentences as I have no interest in your generalized critique of the left.

Well said. The safe route for those who would rather ignore the horrible track record of the Left in regards to Islam is to feign disinterest due to vaguely stated misgivings.

Quote from: Q-Man on June 14, 2009, 05:16 PM
I might, had not I lost all respect for you several months ago after you got your panties in a bunch because people were pointing out things they liked about Islam in a thread specifically for that purpose, then melted-down after I repeatedly schooled yer ass, and you started posting bizarre photos and unhinged one-liners.

Is that so? This coming from someone who told me to "f**k off" or something to that effect on that thread. That thread underwent a meltdown due to the fact that most things that are attributed to Islam as being "good" are in reality deeply subjective attachments on the aesthetic level that, at the end of the day, based on projective identification. I was snarky but I never lost my composure and then again Berbs saved your ass.

Also, I challenged the veneration for Paul Robeson and since this is 2009 and you are claiming to be an anarcho-syndicalist then you should be responsible enough to know that highlighting Robeson is going to attract skepticism. Why on earth would someone who claims to be an anarcho-syndicalist trumpet a Communist and a Stalinist one at that? Did you think you could get away without that being questioned? Seriously. If there is anything "bizarre" and "unhinged" in the back-and-forth between you and I it is idolatry like that. The rest is best left to Desmond. Someone like Robeson used the legacy of slavery and discrimination (that was still rampant) in the US to serve as an excuse to not address the fact that so many millions had died under Stalin. His excuse that "this was a question for the Soviet Union" is eerily similar to that of many leftists in the West who consider even the violence against non-Muslims by Muslims in the West to be a "question for the Muslims" and nobody else. That was evasive and irresponsible and he made use of the irrational but emotionally appealing refrain of blaming even the questionable personalities on the HUAC as being responsible for the sufferings of black Americans via the slave trade and plantations. Clarence Darrow's writings illluminated me about the backbiting that went on as the Communist Party and the NAACP clashed over control of the legal representation of the Scottsboro Boys. He also criticized "Big Bill" Haywood who fled the US while running the IWW and lived comfortably in Russia in a way that should leave his admirers aghast. So while their passion is understandable they still compromised themselves and we should always take that into consideration or we just might repeat the habit of having the same deliberate blindspots. In fact, too many already are continuing that legacy.

Quote from: Q-Man on June 14, 2009, 05:16 PM
I did quickly scan through your post, however, and your comparison of changing political beliefs to apostasy is lame, weak, and disingenuous. It's not even worth replying to.

Now that was good. Moments such as this require a blase response that hopefully will stick when trying to portray my opposing viewpoint in a demeaning light.
- Colonel Q-Daffi
- White Trash Sand Wigga
- Pub Regular
- offline
Re: Saudi Arabia Blood Money: Sexist & Bigoted!
Reply #47 - June 19, 2009, 03:34 PM

Quote from: Ansar al-Zindiqi on June 19, 2009, 03:16 PM
Buncha stuff

Ansar, you're smart, obviously knowledgeable, and, in my personal opinion, hate-filled, monomaniacal and a lunatic. So I'm done talking with you except to respond to one point you made for everyone's clarification-- I do not claim to be an anarcho-syndicalist. I believe I stated I once did consider myself to be an anarcho-syndicalist and although I still hold some anarcho-syndicalist beliefs, I would not now call myself that.

Oh, and you're probably right that I told you to fuck off. That's normally what I tell assholes.

fuck you
- Ansar al-Zindiqi
- Member
- offline
Re: Saudi Arabia Blood Money: Sexist & Bigoted!
Reply #48 - June 19, 2009, 05:10 PM

Quote from: Q-Man on June 19, 2009, 03:34 PM
Ansar, you're smart, obviously knowledgeable, and, in my personal opinion, hate-filled, monomaniacal and a lunatic. So I'm done talking with you except to respond to one point you made for everyone's clarification-- I do not claim to be an anarcho-syndicalist. I believe I stated I once did consider myself to be an anarcho-syndicalist and although I still hold some anarcho-syndicalist beliefs, I would not now call myself that.

Oh, and you're probably right that I told you to fuck off. That's normally what I tell assholes.

Well, thanks for clearing up the anarcho-syndicalist thingy. As for your so well-worded refrain at the end it is obvious that you will promote personal animosity over being a part of a truly open public discourse over Islam and the spin-off issues that inevitably follow. Remember that this must be constantly maintained and you must be vigilant when it comes to the likes of me. Be incisive and cutting when directing any remarks towards me and make sure it touches a nerve and really gets me going. That way those insults will have some staying power. Oh . . . . of maybe three seconds. And then the difficult issues with all their paradoxical and counter-intuitive natures will re-emerge again and again. With or without me
- Colonel Q-Daffi
- White Trash Sand Wigga
- Pub Regular
- offline
Re: Saudi Arabia Blood Money: Sexist & Bigoted!
Reply #49 - June 19, 2009, 05:34 PM

Quote from: Ansar al-Zindiqi on June 19, 2009, 05:10 PM
Well, thanks for clearing up the anarcho-syndicalist thingy. As for your so well-worded refrain at the end it is obvious that you will promote personal animosity over being a part of a truly open public discourse over Islam and the spin-off issues that inevitably follow. Remember that this must be constantly maintained and you must be vigilant when it comes to the likes of me. Be incisive and cutting when directing any remarks towards me and make sure it touches a nerve and really gets me going. That way those insults will have some staying power. Oh . . . . of maybe three seconds. And then the difficult issues with all their paradoxical and counter-intuitive natures will re-emerge again and again. With or without me

Cool, we're on the same page then. Later.

fuck you
- Sameer
- Ex-Muslim
- offline
Re: Saudi Arabia Blood Money: Sexist & Bigoted!
Reply #50 - August 28, 2009, 11:30 AM

The whole muslims who follow Islam...sucks..............

That is sick..as for them .....Religion is everything....Those morons dont know anything about Humanity...
Previous page 1 2« Previous thread | Next thread »